Post on 18-Dec-2015
Caroline Smith DeWaalFood Safety Director, CSPIFeb. 16, 2012Tampa, Florida
NATIONAL TURKEY FEDERATION
ANNUAL CONVENTION
Bi-national consumer advocacy organization founded in 1971 by Michael Jacobson, Ph.D.
Focuses on nutrition, health, and food safety
Publishes award-winning Nutrition Action Healthletter
Represents over 900,000 subscriber/ members in the U.S. and Canada
CSPI: FOUR DECADES OF CONSUMER ADVOCACY
New Poultry Inspection System (P.I.S.)Emerging PathogensPerformance Standards
FSMASafe Meat and Poultry Act
Outbreak Alert!: Results from 1999-2008 for the turkey industry
CHARTING OUR COURSE
3
Major overhaul of poultry inspection announced last month
Agency stresses that this is not HIMP… Data on HIMP is less than definitive:
No thorough independent review since 2001 Testing data show some plants exceed the performance
standards; others do notClear that the poultry inspection system needs
updating: Goals of new P.I.S:
Decrease risk of foodborne illness Decrease expenses for government and industry Focus FSIS inspectors on aspects most related to food
safety
Worthy goals, but are these steps the right ones?
NEW POULTRY INSPECTION SYSTEM
Establishment must document plans to prevent: Carcass contamination by enteric pathogens and fecal
material, and to enforce zero tolerance for fecal contamination entering the chill tank.
Establishments must test to validate the eff ectiveness of those plans.
Establishments must maintain enhanced recordkeeping requirements to document that products meet the definition of ready-to-cook (RTC) poultry.
Devil is in the details– some proposed ‘improvements’ need fleshing out before we will know how eff ective they’ll be.
THE NEW P.I.S. IMPROVEMENTS
Mandatory elements (aff ecting all 289 poultry, non-ratite establishments):New testing conducted by each facility but the
adequacy of testing regime is unclear: no required frequency or target organisms Removal of previous testing requirements for generic
E. coli
Replacement of prescriptive time/temperature chilling with requirement for establishment-developed procedures Aligned with HACCP, but Agency must review SIP
waivers to determine effectiveness of alternative methods
THE NEW P.I.S.WAIT-AND-SEE
6
Voluntary elements (aff ecting those establishments operating under the new P.I.S.):Reassignment of carcass sorting activities from FSIS -
inspector to the establishment Who sets the standards for sorting? How much
discretion do they have? Is there adequate training for sorters?
Line speed changes Is “stopping the line” a real enforcement tool for
inspectors? How frequently do they use it, and do they feel pressured to avoid doing so?
What is the line speed for the company sorter?
THE NEW P.I.S.WAIT-AND-SEE
RECOGNIZING EMERGING PATHOGENS AND NEW VEHICLES
E. coli O104:H4 sprout outbreak in Europe, summer 2011 Over 4300 ill, 900+ HUS cases, approx. 50 deaths
S. Heidelberg outbreak in ground turkey in 2011 26 states, 136 ill, 37 hospitalizations, 1 death
Listeria monocytogenes cantaloupe outbreak in Colorado, fall 2011 At least 30 deaths
Ubiquitous, grows at refrigeration temperatures
ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANT OUTBREAKS
Mostly Salmonella Ground beef and unpasteurized dairy products most common sources
Ground turkey – 2 outbreaks in 2011, S. Hadar and S. Heidelberg
Ground beef – 7 outbreaks since 2002, S. Newport and S. Typhimurium
The Food Safety Modernization Act passed Congress and was signed into law on January 4, 2011.
It is the beginning of a longer term eff ort to modernize the national food safety system.
The legislation has no specific impact on the meat and poultry industries, but there are elements to consider.
The provision on Performance Standards requires consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture to determine the most significant contaminants.
MODERNIZING FOOD LAW IN THE UNITED
STATES: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
FSMA REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPING PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS
New law requires FDA to take a number of steps in setting performance standards:Determine the most significant foodborne contaminants
Emphasis on contaminants with robust public health data
Pathogen–food category pairing demonstrates the need for good attribution data
Set guidelines or regulations requiring industry controls by product or product classesRe-evaluate list of significant contaminants every two years; periodically review guidance or regulations
If enacted, SMPA would:
Update food safety laws governing the meat and poultry industry to better protect public health through a more integrated food safety system.
Provide the Food Safety and Inspection Service at USDA with statutory direction on managing new and emerging pathogens.
Require FSIS to conduct a public health assessment to improve understanding of the risks associated with meat, poultry and egg products to inform public education and research efforts.
SAFE MEAT & POULTRY ACT, S. 1529
Under this provision, FSIS will have a clearly defined program for determining which pathogens pose the greatest risk to public health and establishing standards that reduce that risk.
A performance standard establishes the degree to which “a step or combination of steps in the production, processing, distribution, or preparation of a food must operate to achieve the required level of control over microbiological contamination.”
A statutory mandate would provide the industry with greater certainty regarding its responsibilities.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS UNDER SMPA
FSIS is required to:Conduct a survey to determine current levels
of food contamination. Establish public health goals and objectives. Define pathogen reduction performance
standards that are suffi cient to reduce pathogens in food and achieve public health goals and objectives.
To assure the effectiveness of the standards –
they are reviewed every three years against the goals and availability of improved controls.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The bill complements the recently passed FDA Food Safety Modernization Act; it would establish better targets for pathogen control, stronger surveillance for foodborne diseases, and new traceability and recall authority.
These steps will help reduce the risk of foodborne disease outbreaks, or provide faster detection and response if an outbreak occurs.
HOW SMPA FITS WITH FSMA
CSPI’s database uses outbreak information primarily from the CDC – only analyzing foodborne outbreaks with identified food sources and etiologies.
Between 1999 and 2008, CSPI analyzed 4,742 outbreaks, which caused 120,570 illnesses in the U.S.
The database is updated and reports are published regularly.
OUTBREAK ALERT!
RELATIVE RATES OF ILLNESS
19
Dairy
Fruits
Vegetables
Eggs
Pork
Beef
Chicken
Turkey
Seafood
0 5 10 15 20
1.00230054536059
1
2
5
6
8
8
18
18
Relative Rates of Illnesses by Food Category Adjusted for Consumption, 1999-2008
N=88,433 Illnesses 2,682 Outbreaks
Number of Illnesses relative to those caused by Dairy Products
Illnesses per Billion Pounds Consumption 1999-2008
Yearly Average Illness Data from Outbreak Alert!
Yearly Average Consumption (Billion lbs.) USDA ERS Data
Illnesses/Billion lbs. Relativ
e Rate:
Beef 1035 11.95 87 8Dairy 622 55.33 11 1Eggs 333 6.35 52 5Pork 491 8.07 61 6Produce 2785 91.54 30 3Fruits 462 38.86 12 1Vegetables 1195 51.79 23 2Seafood 634 3.12 203 18Poultry 1287 12.28 105 10
Turkey 512 2.61 196 18Chicken 834 9.67 86 8
CONSUMPTION AND ILLNESSES TURKEY VS. CHICKEN
20
Most commonly identified foods in CDC’s line-listing:Turkey – 21Roasted turkey – 21Smoked turkey – 11Baked turkey – 8Deli meat, sliced turkey – 10Sandwich, turkey – 25Turkey, gravy – 8Turkey, stuffi ng – 8
TURKEY PRODUCTS IMPLICATED
THANK YOU!
Caroline Smith DeWaalFood Safety Director
Center for Science in the Public Interest1220 L St., NW Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: (202) 777-8364 Fax: (202) 265-4954E-mail: cdewaal@cspinet.org
On the internet: www.cspinet.org and www.safefoodinternational.org